[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
> I suppose one could say to them, "Bzzt. You lose. Design your own query
> language for your data, but it ain't XML."
Ah, I just did in a reply to Dare Obasanjo that I sent a second before
getting your message:-)
> Why, I have to ask, didn't you just write SQL in the first place.
that isn't exactly a ringing endorcement of Xpath2 from a working group
member. Why is it that I get the feeling that XSLT group just got tired
and couldn't be bothered to work on Xpath until it was too late and it
had already been severly compromised into a database query language.
> Query's odd non-XML syntax
Personally I think Xquery should be ruled out of order as a W3C spec on
those grounds if nothing else. Re-using almost all the XML syntax
in a non XML language would be strange for anyone to do, but for the W3C
to do it is just ....
In any event, I still don't see how providing the ability to access
typed data causes problems except for the case where you want to query
the original lexical form of the data and its typed value in the same
processor at the same time.
I'd believe that if you showed me how in an XSLT2 stylesheet I could say
If the XML parser has corrupted my data stop here so I can find a
different parser.
David
_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet
delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further
information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or alternatively call
Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service.
|
